Network Working Group A. Swartz
Request for Comments: 3870 AaronSw.com
Category: Informational September 2004
Network Working Group A. Swartz
Request for Comments: 3870 AaronSw.com
Category: Informational September 2004
application/rdf+xml Media Type Registration
应用程序/rdf+xml媒体类型注册
Status of this Memo
本备忘录的状况
This memo provides information for the Internet community. It does not specify an Internet standard of any kind. Distribution of this memo is unlimited.
本备忘录为互联网社区提供信息。它没有规定任何类型的互联网标准。本备忘录的分发不受限制。
Copyright Notice
版权公告
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2004年）。
Abstract
摘要
This document describes a media type (application/rdf+xml) for use with the Extensible Markup Language (XML) serialization of the Resource Description Framework (RDF). RDF is a language designed to support the Semantic Web, by facilitating resource description and data exchange on the Web. RDF provides common structures that can be used for interoperable data exchange and follows the World Wide Web Consortium (W3C) design principles of interoperability, evolution, and decentralization.
本文档描述了一种媒体类型（application/rdf+xml），用于资源描述框架（rdf）的可扩展标记语言（xml）序列化。RDF是一种旨在支持语义Web的语言，它促进了Web上的资源描述和数据交换。RDF提供了可用于互操作数据交换的通用结构，并遵循了万维网联盟（W3C）关于互操作性、演进和分散的设计原则。
Table of Contents
目录
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. application/rdf+xml Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Fragment Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Historical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
2. application/rdf+xml Registration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
3. Fragment Identifiers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
4. Historical Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
5. IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
6. Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
7. Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
8. References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8.1. Normative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
8.2. Informative References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
9. Author's Address . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
10. Full Copyright Statement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8
RDF is a language designed to support the Semantic Web, by facilitating resource description and data exchange on the Web. RDF provides common structures that can be used for interoperable data exchange and follows the W3C design principles of interoperability, evolution, and decentralization.
RDF是一种旨在支持语义Web的语言，它促进了Web上的资源描述和数据交换。RDF提供了可用于互操作数据交换的通用结构，并遵循W3C互操作性、演化和分散的设计原则。
While the RDF data model [2] can be serialized in many ways, the W3C has defined the RDF/XML syntax [1] to allow RDF to be serialized in an XML format. The application/rdf+xml media type allows RDF consumers to identify RDF/XML documents so that they can be processed properly.
虽然RDF数据模型[2]可以通过多种方式进行序列化，但W3C已经定义了RDF/XML语法[1]，允许RDF以XML格式进行序列化。application/rdf+xml媒体类型允许rdf使用者识别rdf/xml文档，以便正确处理它们。
The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT", "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP 14, RFC 2119 [6].
本文件中的关键词“必须”、“不得”、“要求”、“应”、“不应”、“应”、“不应”、“建议”、“可”和“可选”应按照BCP 14、RFC 2119[6]中的描述进行解释。
This is a media type registration as defined in RFC 2048, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures" [5].
这是RFC 2048“多用途Internet邮件扩展（MIME）第四部分：注册程序”中定义的媒体类型注册[5]。
MIME media type name: application
MIME媒体类型名称：应用程序
MIME subtype name: rdf+xml
MIME子类型名称：rdf+xml
Required parameters: none
所需参数：无
Optional parameters: charset
可选参数：字符集
Same as charset parameter of application/xml, defined in RFC 3023 [4].
与RFC 3023[4]中定义的application/xml的charset参数相同。
Encoding considerations:
编码注意事项：
Same as charset parameter of application/xml, defined in RFC 3023 [4].
与RFC 3023[4]中定义的application/xml的charset参数相同。
Security considerations:
安全考虑：
See "Security Considerations" (Section 6).
见“安全注意事项”（第6节）。
Interoperability considerations:
互操作性注意事项：
It is RECOMMENDED that RDF documents follow the newer RDF/XML Syntax Grammar [1] as opposed to the older RDF Model and Syntax specification [7].
建议RDF文档遵循较新的RDF/XML语法[1]，而不是较旧的RDF模型和语法规范[7]。
RDF is intended to allow common information to be exchanged between disparate applications. A basis for building common understanding is provided by a formal semantics [3], and applications that use RDF should do so in ways that are consistent with this.
RDF旨在允许在不同的应用程序之间交换公共信息。形式语义[3]提供了建立共识的基础，使用RDF的应用程序应该以与此一致的方式来实现这一点。
Published specification:
已发布的规范：
see RDF/XML Syntax Grammar [1] and RDF: Concepts and Abstract Syntax [2] and the older RDF Model and Syntax [7]
请参阅RDF/XML语法[1]和RDF：概念和抽象语法[2]以及旧的RDF模型和语法[7]
Applications which use this media type:
使用此媒体类型的应用程序：
RDF is device-, platform-, and vendor-neutral and is supported by a range of Web user agents and authoring tools.
RDF与设备、平台和供应商无关，并由一系列Web用户代理和创作工具支持。
Additional information:
其他信息：
Magic number(s): none
幻数：无
Although no byte sequences can be counted on to consistently identify RDF, RDF documents will have the sequence "http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" to identify the RDF namespace. This will usually be towards the top of the document.
虽然没有字节序列可以用来一致地识别RDF，但RDF文档将具有“字节序列”http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#“以标识RDF命名空间。这通常位于文档的顶部。
File extension(s): .rdf
文件扩展名：.rdf
Macintosh File Type Code(s): "rdf "
Macintosh文件类型代码：“rdf”
For further information:
有关进一步资料：
Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
Dan Brickley <danbri@w3.org>
RDF Interest Group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
RDF Interest Group <www-rdf-interest@w3.org>
More information may be found on the RDF website:
更多信息可在RDF网站上找到：
<http://www.w3.org/RDF/>
<http://www.w3.org/RDF/>
Intended usage: COMMON
预期用途：普通
Author/Change controller:
作者/变更控制员：
The RDF specification is a work product of the World Wide Web Consortium. The W3C and the W3C RDF Core Working Group have change control over the specification.
RDF规范是万维网联盟的工作产品。W3C和W3CRDF核心工作组对规范具有变更控制权。
The rdf:ID and rdf:about attributes can be used to define fragments in an RDF document.
rdf:ID和rdf:about属性可用于定义rdf文档中的片段。
Section 4.1 of the URI specification [8] notes that the semantics of a fragment identifier (part of a URI after a "#") is a property of the data resulting from a retrieval action, and that the format and interpretation of fragment identifiers is dependent on the media type of the retrieval result.
URI规范[8]第4.1节指出，片段标识符（URI中“#”）的语义是检索操作产生的数据的属性，片段标识符的格式和解释取决于检索结果的媒体类型。
In RDF, the thing identified by a URI with fragment identifier does not necessarily bear any particular relationship to the thing identified by the URI alone. This differs from some readings of the URI specification [8], so attention is recommended when creating new RDF terms which use fragment identifiers.
在RDF中，由具有片段标识符的URI标识的对象不一定与仅由URI标识的对象具有任何特定关系。这与URI规范[8]的某些阅读内容不同，因此建议在创建使用片段标识符的新RDF术语时注意。
More details on RDF's treatment of fragment identifiers can be found in the section "Fragment Identifiers" of the RDF Concepts document [2].
有关RDF处理片段标识符的更多详细信息，请参见RDF概念文档[2]的“片段标识符”一节。
This media type was reserved in RFC 3023 [4], saying:
RFC 3023[4]中保留了此媒体类型，表示：
RDF documents identified using this MIME type are XML documents whose content describes metadata, as defined by [7]. As a format based on XML, RDF documents SHOULD use the '+xml' suffix convention in their MIME content-type identifier. However, no content type has yet been registered for RDF and so this media type should not be used until such registration has been completed.
使用此MIME类型标识的RDF文档是XML文档，其内容描述元数据，如[7]所定义。作为一种基于XML的格式，RDF文档应该在其MIME内容类型标识符中使用“+XML”后缀约定。但是，尚未为RDF注册任何内容类型，因此在完成此类注册之前，不应使用此媒体类型。
This document calls for registration of a new MIME media type, according to the registration in Section 2.
根据第2节中的注册，本文档要求注册一种新的MIME媒体类型。
RDF is a generic format for exchanging application information, but application designers must not assume that it provides generic protection against security threats. RFC 3023 [4], section 10, discusses security concerns for generic XML, which are also applicable to RDF.
RDF是一种用于交换应用程序信息的通用格式，但应用程序设计者不能假定它提供了针对安全威胁的通用保护。RFC 3023[4]第10节讨论了通用XML的安全问题，这些问题也适用于RDF。
RDF data can be secured for integrity, authenticity and confidentiality using any of the mechanisms available for MIME and XML data, including XML signature, XML encryption, S/MIME, OpenPGP or transport or session level security (e.g., see [9], especially sections 3.4, 3.5, 3.10, [10], [11], [12]).
RDF数据的完整性、真实性和机密性可以使用MIME和XML数据可用的任何机制进行保护，包括XML签名、XML加密、S/MIME、OpenPGP或传输或会话级安全（例如，请参见[9]，特别是第3.4、3.5、3.10、[10]、[11]、[12]节）。
RDF is intended to be used in documents that may make assertions about anything, and to this end includes a specification of formal semantics [3]. The semantics provide a basis for combining information from a variety of sources, which may lead to RDF assertions of facts (either by direct assertion, or via logical deduction) that are false, or whose veracity is unclear. RDF application designers should not omit consideration of the reliability of processed information. The formal semantics of RDF can help to enhance reliability, since RDF assertions may be linked to a formal description of their derivation. There is ongoing exploration of mechanisms to record and handle provenance of RDF information. As far as general techniques are concerned, these are still areas of ongoing research, and application designers must be aware, as always, of "Garbage-in, Garbage-out".
RDF旨在用于可能对任何事物做出断言的文档中，为此目的，它包括一个形式语义规范[3]。语义为组合来自各种来源的信息提供了基础，这可能导致RDF对事实的断言（通过直接断言或逻辑推断）是错误的，或其准确性不明确。RDF应用程序设计人员不应忽略处理信息的可靠性。RDF的形式语义有助于提高可靠性，因为RDF断言可以链接到其派生的形式描述。目前正在探索记录和处理RDF信息来源的机制。就一般技术而言，这些仍然是正在进行的研究领域，应用程序设计者必须始终注意“垃圾输入，垃圾输出”。
Thanks to Dan Connolly for writing the first version of this document [13], to Andy Powell for <http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#mime-types-for-rdf-docs>, to Marshall Rose for his <http://xml.resource.org/> converter, and to Graham Klyne, Jan Grant, and Dave Beckett for their helpful comments on early versions of this document.
感谢Dan Connolly编写了本文件的第一版[13]，感谢Andy Powell<http://www.w3.org/2000/03/rdf-tracking/#mime-rdf docs>的类型，提交给Marshall Rose<http://xml.resource.org/>感谢Graham Klyne、Jan Grant和Dave Beckett对本文档早期版本的有益评论。
[1] Beckett, D., "RDF/XML Syntax Specification (Revised)", W3C rdf-syntax-grammar, February 2004, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/>.
[1] Beckett，D.，“RDF/XML语法规范（修订版）”，W3C RDF语法，2004年2月<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-syntax-grammar-20040210/>.
[2] Klyne, G. and J. Carroll, "Resource Description Framework (RDF): Concepts and Abstract Syntax", W3C rdf-concepts, February 2004, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/>.
[2] Klyne，G.和J.Carroll，“资源描述框架（RDF）：概念和抽象语法”，W3C RDF概念，2004年2月<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-concepts-20040210/>.
[3] Hayes, P., "RDF Model Theory", W3C rdf-mt, February 2004, <http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/>.
[3] Hayes，P.，“RDF模型理论”，W3C RDF mt，2004年2月<http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-rdf-mt-20040210/>.
[4] Murata, M., St.Laurent, S. and D. Kohn, "XML Media Types", RFC 3023, January 2001.
[4] Murata，M.，St.Laurent，S.和D.Kohn，“XML媒体类型”，RFC 3023，2001年1月。
[5] Freed, N., Klensin, J. and J. Postel, "Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part Four: Registration Procedures", BCP 13, RFC 2048, November 1996.
[5] Freed，N.，Klensin，J.和J.Postel，“多用途互联网邮件扩展（MIME）第四部分：注册程序”，BCP 13，RFC 2048，1996年11月。
[6] Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119, March 1997.
[6] Bradner，S.，“RFC中用于表示需求水平的关键词”，BCP 14，RFC 2119，1997年3月。
[7] Lassila, O. and R. Swick, "Resource Description Framework (RDF) Model and Syntax Specification", W3C REC-rdf-syntax, February 1999, <http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax>.
[7] Lassila，O.和R.Swick，“资源描述框架（RDF）模型和语法规范”，W3C REC RDF语法，1999年2月<http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-rdf-syntax>.
[8] Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R. and L. Masinter, "Uniform Resource Identifiers (URI): Generic Syntax", RFC 2396, August 1998.
[8] Berners Lee，T.，Fielding，R.和L.Masinter，“统一资源标识符（URI）：通用语法”，RFC 2396，1998年8月。
[9] Bellovin, S., Schiller, J. and C. Kaufman, Eds., "Security Mechanisms for the Internet", RFC 3631, December 2003.
[9] Bellovin，S.，Schiller，J.和C.Kaufman编辑，“互联网的安全机制”，RFC 36312003年12月。
[10] Rescorla, E., "HTTP Over TLS", RFC 2818, May 2000.
[10] Rescorla，E.，“TLS上的HTTP”，RFC 2818，2000年5月。
[11] Eastlake, D., Reagle, J. and D. Solo, "(Extensible Markup Language) XML-Signature Syntax and Processing", RFC 3275, March 2002.
[11] Eastlake，D.，Reagle，J.和D.Solo，“（可扩展标记语言）XML签名语法和处理”，RFC3275，2002年3月。
[12] Eastlake, D. and J. Reagle, "XML Encryption Syntax and
Processing", W3C xmlenc-core, December 2002,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xmlenc-core-20021210/>
[12] Eastlake, D. and J. Reagle, "XML Encryption Syntax and
Processing", W3C xmlenc-core, December 2002,
<http://www.w3.org/TR/2002/REC-xmlenc-core-20021210/>
[13] Connolly, D., "A media type for Resource Description Framework (RDF)", March 2001, <http://www.w3.org/2001/03mr/rdf_mt>.
[13] Connolly，D.，“资源描述框架（RDF）的媒体类型”，2001年3月<http://www.w3.org/2001/03mr/rdf_mt>.
Aaron Swartz AaronSw.com 349 Marshman Highland Park, IL 60035 USA
Aaron Swartz AaronSw.com美国伊利诺伊州马什曼高地公园349号，邮编60035
Phone: +1 847 432 8857
EMail: me@aaronsw.com
URI: http://www.aaronsw.com/
Phone: +1 847 432 8857
EMail: me@aaronsw.com
URI: http://www.aaronsw.com/
Copyright (C) The Internet Society (2004).
版权所有（C）互联网协会（2004年）。
This document is subject to the rights, licenses and restrictions contained in BCP 78, and at www.rfc-editor.org, and except as set forth therein, the authors retain all their rights.
本文件受BCP 78和www.rfc-editor.org中包含的权利、许可和限制的约束，除其中规定外，作者保留其所有权利。
This document and the information contained herein are provided on an "AS IS" basis and THE CONTRIBUTOR, THE ORGANIZATION HE/S HE REPRESENTS OR IS SPONSORED BY (IF ANY), THE INTERNET SOCIETY AND THE INTERNET ENGINEERING TASK FORCE DISCLAIM ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY WARRANTY THAT THE USE OF THE INFORMATION HEREIN WILL NOT INFRINGE ANY RIGHTS OR ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.
本文件及其包含的信息是按“原样”提供的，贡献者、其代表或赞助的组织（如有）、互联网协会和互联网工程任务组不承担任何明示或暗示的担保，包括但不限于任何保证，即使用本文中的信息不会侵犯任何权利，或对适销性或特定用途适用性的任何默示保证。
Intellectual Property
知识产权
The IETF takes no position regarding the validity or scope of any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights that might be claimed to pertain to the implementation or use of the technology described in this document or the extent to which any license under such rights might or might not be available; nor does it represent that it has made any independent effort to identify any such rights. Information on the ISOC's procedures with respect to rights in ISOC Documents can be found in BCP 78 and BCP 79.
IETF对可能声称与本文件所述技术的实施或使用有关的任何知识产权或其他权利的有效性或范围，或此类权利下的任何许可可能或可能不可用的程度，不采取任何立场；它也不表示它已作出任何独立努力来确定任何此类权利。有关ISOC文件中权利的ISOC程序信息，请参见BCP 78和BCP 79。
Copies of IPR disclosures made to the IETF Secretariat and any assurances of licenses to be made available, or the result of an attempt made to obtain a general license or permission for the use of such proprietary rights by implementers or users of this specification can be obtained from the IETF on-line IPR repository at http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
向IETF秘书处披露的知识产权副本和任何许可证保证，或本规范实施者或用户试图获得使用此类专有权利的一般许可证或许可的结果，可从IETF在线知识产权存储库获取，网址为http://www.ietf.org/ipr.
The IETF invites any interested party to bring to its attention any copyrights, patents or patent applications, or other proprietary rights that may cover technology that may be required to implement this standard. Please address the information to the IETF at ietf-ipr@ietf.org.
IETF邀请任何相关方提请其注意任何版权、专利或专利申请，或其他可能涵盖实施本标准所需技术的专有权利。请将信息发送至IETF的IETF-ipr@ietf.org.
Acknowledgement
确认
Funding for the RFC Editor function is currently provided by the Internet Society.
RFC编辑功能的资金目前由互联网协会提供。